2012
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06996.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ability of non‐invasive intermittent blood pressure monitoring and a continuous non‐invasive arterial pressure monitor (CNAP) to provide new readings in each 1‐min interval during elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia

Abstract: SummaryWe compared the ability of automated non-invasive intermittent oscillometric blood pressure monitoring with a new device, CNAP TM (continuous non-invasive arterial pressure) to provide a new blood pressure reading in each 1-min interval between spinal anaesthesia and delivery during caesarean section. We also compared the accuracy of continuous non-invasive arterial pressure readings with non-invasive blood pressure measurements before spinal anaesthesia. Fiftynine women participated. The non-invasive a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
(13 reference statements)
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Their study results showed that the standard deviation of the difference between the two devices was approximately ± 12 mmHg at the mode (75 mmHg MAP). 95 While these authors did not calculate the limits of agreement, a rough estimate that does not take into account repeated measures suggests that the confidence intervals of standard NIBP are worse than those reported in a number of volume-clamp studies [e.g., Martina (Nexfin), 96 Weiss (Nexfin), 97 Jeleazcov (CNAP), 98 Jagadeesh (CNAP), 99 Dewhirst (CNAP), 100 Tobias (CNAP), 101 and Ilies (CNAP)] 102 but similar to those in other volume-clamp studies [Biais (CNAP), 103 Hahn (CNAP), 104 McCarthy 2012 (CNAP), 105 and Schramm (CNAP)]. 106 At the extremes (significantly above or below a MAP of 75 mmHg), when accurate measurement of blood pressure is increasingly important, NIBP performance deteriorated.…”
Section: Clinical Contextmentioning
confidence: 51%
“…Their study results showed that the standard deviation of the difference between the two devices was approximately ± 12 mmHg at the mode (75 mmHg MAP). 95 While these authors did not calculate the limits of agreement, a rough estimate that does not take into account repeated measures suggests that the confidence intervals of standard NIBP are worse than those reported in a number of volume-clamp studies [e.g., Martina (Nexfin), 96 Weiss (Nexfin), 97 Jeleazcov (CNAP), 98 Jagadeesh (CNAP), 99 Dewhirst (CNAP), 100 Tobias (CNAP), 101 and Ilies (CNAP)] 102 but similar to those in other volume-clamp studies [Biais (CNAP), 103 Hahn (CNAP), 104 McCarthy 2012 (CNAP), 105 and Schramm (CNAP)]. 106 At the extremes (significantly above or below a MAP of 75 mmHg), when accurate measurement of blood pressure is increasingly important, NIBP performance deteriorated.…”
Section: Clinical Contextmentioning
confidence: 51%
“…This is a very large potential source of bias. Indeed, McCarthy et al, 1 in a study comparing CNAP and traditional NIBP in cesarean delivery patients undergoing spinal anesthesia, noted that the CNAP device failed at a higher rate than NIBP measured every minute.…”
Section: Commentmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The PulseCO algorithm that was used in analysis of arterial pressure curve by LiDCORapid monitor, has been validated and used in healthy, pregnant patients receiving spinal anaesthesia (66,67). The absolute value of CI measured with this method has been controversial, however its value for monitoring the trends in CI values has been validated and accepted, also in spinal anaesthesia (30,63,68). We were aware of the limitations of the method used in the assessment of absolute values of CI; also in SVRI calculations the mean atrial pressure was not measured but arbitrarily set to 7 mmHg.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%